Don Mattrick, Microsoft’s President of Interactive Entertainment Business, in an interview with WSJ:
Microsoft’s Mattrick says he doesn’t think compatibility is really a problem. He said only 5% of customers play older games on a new videogame system anyway, so spending time and money to develop technology to allow them to play older games isn’t worth it.
“If you’re backwards compatible, you’re really backwards,” he said.
Okay, it might not be a widely-used feature. But completely trashing backwards compatibility this way is quite absurd.
Curious Rat on Xbox One’s qualifications for being an entertainment console:
[There's] one glaring problem staring it in the face: content. No amount of bleeding-edge silicon can give viewers the on-demand content they want, either through a subscription service or a la carte channels. HBO Go is part of the Xbox One’s dashboard, but it will require a cable subscription to work.
It isn’t really Microsoft’s fault that they can’t get HBO to change their minds on Go, but convincing entertainment companies to get their content on the One remains a huge obstacle between it and success. As consoles are losing relevancy, consoles are (and should be) evolving into living room entertainment centers that are beyond gaming. But you can’t just slap Netflix on anything anymore, or merely slather a bunch of features on to give it power in the living room — you have to do the dirty work of negotiating with the film and music companies and creating an entertainment platform yourself.
I think Larry (and all other technology industry leaders) should actually practice what they preach if they want others to follow.
If Google really wants to become a highly influential company in the industry, they need to follow exactly what Larry has said. Even though his argument may sound absurd coming from him (as Gruber points out), his ideas behind it are solid.
Our industry, and Google, all of you, we’re really only at one percent of what we can do… we’re really moving slow. And some of that is due to negativity.
Not every new technology is zero-sum. Being negative is not how we make progress.
In the big picture, competition in the tech industry (and any industry, really) is a battle of business ideologies: the best one wins. Lately, Apple is winning with their own brand of strategies and ethics. Google can make as much cool stuff as they want, but to really succeed, they need to take a hard look at the business side of things, which they’ve started to do, but need to catch up on. Because in actuality, business is what it inevitably boils down to. And if they excel in that aspect, in addition to releasing great products, Google will truly become the next king of tech after Apple.
The Loop‘s Jim Dalrymple comments:
Remember Apple’s previous keynotes. The crowd didn’t roar and applaud for the flat design elements, they cheered when the Passbook app shredded a card with a realistic shredder that popped up on the screen.
Apple needs to refine that design, not replace it.
Although I love the flat-design aesthetic, I would find it disappointing if Apple does capitulate and goes flat like anyone else. They have to carve out their own design niche somehow.